A. The Defendant of mistake of facts did not want police officers E and F to take a bath, francing them, and spathize them.

Even if such act was committed, the above police officers attempted to force the defendant who was dispatched after the defendant's disturbance was terminated and refused to act voluntarily, and the defendant took a bath against the above illegal arrest by the police officers. Thus, the illegality as self-defense is excluded.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 4 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, namely, E, at an investigative agency and the lower court’s court, “E was sent to the site with F upon receiving a report by the Defendant’s seat.” After checking the reported fact from the reporter who was the owner of the house located in the Defendant’s residence, the Defendant opened an entrance to the Defendant’s residence. As the Defendant opened and sent the entrance, the Defendant opened the entrance, sent out the entrance, sent out the entrance, and gave attention to the Defendant’s behavior, and the Defendant took a bath to himself, and the Defendant was assaulted to the effect that “The Defendant was arrested as an offender in the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties.” At the investigation agency and the lower court’s court’s decision that “A police officer’s desire to commit assault from the Defendant, who was said to be the owner of the house located in the Defendant’s residence, and the police officer’s act of opening the entrance at the time of the Defendant’s request to the effect that the Defendant was closed.”